I just have to say the very idea that this bill is necessary is absurd. We have already had the can-or-can't-Americans-own-guns-debate...in case you haven't read a history book recently it happened over 230 years ago! And the answer was so definitely in favor of our right to bear arms that it was listed within the Constitution itself! (Albeit the bill of rights, but as they were amendments are now considered equal to the constitution.) And in case we forgot, the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land.
This bill is a sham. It's an unnecessary waste of tax-payers money. Let the progressive/mao-loving dems try and make it illegal to own a gun. I'll take mine right up to their front door & dare them to arrest me for it. Know your rights Americans. They are attempting again to outstep their powers...it's been happening since the early 20th century and it's time to put a halt to their disgusting growth of federal government powers. They have NO RIGHT to do half the things they're doing!

Exactly, that is why we need to get involved in making sure we take names and kick out the ones that go against what the American people want. Let people know about this web site and how they can follow the bills and see how their elected officials have voted on a particular subject. Lets all make a difference this comming election, take back our Country. Take back our freedoms that have been given away to big government throughout the years. How many politicians have gotten rich by selling out America? Thats why they go into little rooms behind closed doors to make deals where the American people can't see what they are doing. They are corrupt and need to be delt with next election!

This to me, seems to be about as useful as hr 45. Another useless bill that will either impede in the people's freedoms, or support those that would cause harm. Why do we need this bill? Apparently the hr 45 and hr 17 authors must be related. They were lying around smoking pot then decided to write something stupid. (Stupid-the act, or lack of, doing something one knows is necessary/unnecessary). This bill is unncessary.

Once we lose the right to bear arms we are slaves to the government. Hitler banned personal ownership of guns and look what he did. Our president Barack "hussien" Obama is trying very hard to fill the shoes of Hitler and other dictators. It is up to us to keep our firearms and if that requires us to fight for the right then we should. Many men and women since the founding fathers have died for us to keep this right, it may be getting time for us to sacrifice in the same way so that our kids will have a country to call home in the near future.

This bill does not fit the nation we live in now and that's why it will never see the light of day. Our society is so focused on the idea of being politically correct and everyone holding hands. This bill would destroy the perfect America we have made. To think people would walk around with guns for protection is just not right. "I'm being sarcastic!"

oh I forgot any minorities too. I belong to NRA but keeping pistols in homes is inviting trouble. Accidental death rates for children where hand guns are in the home are too high. In my view 1 is too many!!!!

Is that so you can shoot the unemployed, homeless and those without insurance when they ask for help.

So is this like what we have in Florida in terms of "Self-Defense"? Took me a few moments to realize that this bill doesn't necessarily apply to me, but I can see why the rest of the states would want this. I say that our great republic should vote this is, as in the constitution we have the right to arm bears and carry guns. What's the point when you cannot use them.

This bill is so heavily sopported that it will die because of no action. The Dem's will not bring it to the floor!!!!!!!!!

Treaties cannot supersede the fundamental rights of the Constitution.

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

ProtoProtoss (2 of 2)
What happens if we all just say NO. I mean, we outnumber the gov. by far... If they strip us of our defenses then they strip us of our alleged freedom as well as our ABILITY to defend those alleges. People need to wake up and all stand up instead of just letting things go as they may.

We, the people, are like a hand... separated we are just fingers and can individually only do so much. But together... we form a helluva fist and can strike a devastating blow.

ProtoProtoss (1 of 2)
In reference to a comment I read minutes ago, I must completely concur. What congress fails to realize is that no LAW nor BILL will ever apply to criminals. A sign being posted saying "no guns allowed" is simply saying, hey if your a criminal come on in with a gun because nobody inside is allowed to defend themselves. Often I wonder if those passing the bills are planning mischievous deeds in which they are passing this craziness in order to prepare for what they plan to do. It's ridiculous.

There IS no longer a Constitution nor a Bill of Rights nor anything else that was supposed to remain unchanged. As time progresses, every single right we've ever been falsely led to believe we have will eventually be stripped away.

This bill does add a layer of protection for Americans to defend themselves in the event someone tries to do another harm. I only worry about how the courts will see this bill. My idea of violent harm may be different from a judge and jury's.

If our elected officials think it is best to not have the protection of weapons, let them try it out for a year or so first.

falcon
I have to agree with this bill. So far I have herd from the press that obama is trying to take away any knife that is over 41/2 inch's long. Now he wants to take away any hand gun or rifle with a clip, and if you don't comply, it's a jail sentence of 5 yrs. The only 2 problems with this is, 1-not enough prisons, 2-the criminals would not cooperate. The other thing is they (police or army or who knows) can come in your house and inspect it for where you keep your guns.

Shootest, I believe that you and I may agree on many things. This, being one of them. I once heared the saying that a politition's first job was to get elected. A polititions second job was to get re-elected! I have to disagree with one thing you said. What you said is not a step towords socialism, it's a step towords Fascism! The constitution couldn't be any more clear; The right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Too many voters in this country want the government to govern thier lives so they don't have any personal accountability. Funny how, as I age, I drift further away from the republican party (but not to the left). The libertarians are making more sense to me every day They are the TRUE constitutionally focused party.

This is unecessary and pandering. Assault/homicide cases are generally determined at the state level, and the states already have laws permitting and defining self-defense.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. I don't need this law to define that I have this right. It is a God given right that every person is born with and which government cannot take away. I have a right to protect myself and my property from any threat and that includes from a government which professes to want to protect me.

The second amendment to the Constitution should cover this bill! I'd be wary of backing any other bill that would introduce similar and or conflicting language that could eventually be used against our beloved 2nd amendment!

I agree with this bill, but according to the 2nd amendment this right is God given and SELF EVIDENT, what part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED do the demo-commies not understand. Did the Heller Decision not make this plain for all to see. No matter what never surrender, any law passed that is contrary to this or the 2nd amendment is unconstitutional and shall not be obeyed.

apache01 and you are an idiot the south was supported by england because they wanted cheap cotton and tobacco until they realized that a victory with the south was not possible then they withdrew support. You are the one that needs to research history bud because you must have forgotten when and why the 10 amendment was put into the bill of rights, that the powers not delegated expressly to the federal government by the constitution was given to the individual states with supreme power left to the people to determine if the government and its laws were right for them. Now, we lost a lot of power when the the great depression hit in the 30's because Roosevelt was passing his alphabet soup bills that made a lot of state responsibilities federal ones.

How about a Million-Man March on DC?

How do you think the Congress and Senate would react to seeing 1,000,000+ armed citizens standing outside? What would Law Enforcement do? Try and disarm and arrest 1,000,000 armed citizens. Even 50,000 people marching on DC would make a huge impact.

IT IS TIME FOR ACTION. PEACEFUL, YET FIRM.

Sometimes drastic times require drastic measures.

Maybe it's time for a Militia to be formed. A National organization of Gun Owners; not just the NRA. Choose a uniform that everyone can afford (511 is good) and create State, County and City Chapters - just like the Rotary, Lions, and Kiwanis!

Clean up DC, and then clean up the streets and borders.

I do have some reservations on this law simply regarding its necessity. Considering that is purpose is to prevent legal retribution against those who use firearms in self-defense, I see no reason why this bill can be simply repackaged as an amendment to an already existing self-defense legislation. The section on what is "the use of firearms in the defense of self" is way too small to be implemented effectively and the definition given to what qualifies as self-defense is rather open to interpretation. In fact, since most legislation regarding firearms differs greatly at the state level, I don't see why this can't be implemented at a state level as what is already going on now, saving any trouble coming from any possible inconsistencies between the federal and state level. <http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/07/us/07shoot.html>

Hmmm sounds like another hook and sinker. Thanks! That seams to be the way they are pushing things through lately. "Cap and Trade" ring a bell.

I hope this goes through also.. to bad it still will not protect us from the government taking everything from us and forcing us to shoot up our own children with the swine flu vaccine that has not been tested!!!

Well, probably because our Reps don't have the balls to tell these idiots "NO, and we're not Re Addressing this issue anymore, so don't bring it up again!" !!! If they had the guts to do that, these activist groups, whether pro or conn, wouldn't have anything else to do but sit around and cry about some other Rights in our Constitution they don't like. Instead of telling these jackasses that if they don't like our Constitution, leave, go back to where ever it is you came from. Cause this is how this country was set up, and I took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and this country whether you like it or not! Instead, they'd rather cower down to some sort of politically correct approach to everything.

Here you go with Democrats again. Who the hell pushed the Brady Bill thru? The frickin Republicans did after the assasination attempt on Ronald Reagan back in the 80's with Nancy Reagan leading the push!!! They opened the floodgates on all this bullshit! NOT the Democrats.

Yeah, I own guns myself, and to believe in our rights to protect ourselves and families, but READ the bills they've attached to this one!!!! HR 47 we DO NOT WANT! But, it's attached to this one, because they knew people like you, would not read the whole thing and be all on board about passing this one, while they slide HR 47 thru as well, right under your blind noses people!!!! Damn, wake up! Yes we need this one, but not the other one attached. By urging the passing of this one, you are also unwittingly helping get the unwanted one passed as well!!!

But READ the Bill people!!!! Damn!! HR17 DOES have HR45 attached to it!!! We DO want HR17, but not HR45. But pushing for the passage of HR17 as it is right now, you would also be pushing HR45 thru and not even be aware because you haven't taken the time to actually read the whole Bill of HR17. Open your eyes for God's sake!!! It's right there on the General Description of the Bill on the first page when you click on Bill HR17 on this very website!!!

But Theultimateg, check for yourself here. HR45 IS ATTACHED to Bill HR17. So by pushing for the passage of HR17, you're also pushing without you knowing, the passage of HR45 as well!!! Says it right there on the page describing Bill HR17 that other Bills attached to this one is HR45! They're proposing that you CAN defend yourself and family, but with that right you'll also have to register your guns and jump thru all their hoops in order to keep those guns. Read it all before you speak please.